Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

5±Þ º¹ÇÕ·¹ÁøÃæÀüµÈ Ä¡¾Æ¿¡ À־ÀÇ °è¸éÁ¶°Ç°ú À¯Áö±¸ÀÇ ¿µÇâ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ 2Â÷¿øÀ¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¹ýÀû ¿¬±¸

TWO-DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS ON THE EFFECT OF INTERFACE CONDITION AND RETENTION GROOVE IN CLASS V COMPOSITE RESIN RESTORATION

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úº¸Á¸ÇÐȸÁö 1998³â 23±Ç 2È£ p.639 ~ 646
Á¶º´ÈÆ, À¯Çö¹Ì, ±èµ¿È£,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¶º´ÈÆ (  ) - ¼­¿ï´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°úº¸Á¸Çб³½Ç
À¯Çö¹Ì (  ) - »ï¼ºÀÇ·á¿ø
±èµ¿È£ (  ) - »ý»ê±â¼ú¿¬±¸¿ø »ê¾÷±â¼ú±³À°¼¾ÅÍ

Abstract


To evaluate the effect of interface conditions and retention grooves in the Class V composite resin restoration of the maxillary first premolar, the distribution of the values of stress and displacement was analyzed with the two-dimensional finite element method.
The results were obtained as follows:
1. Boundary elements and Stiffness values could be used as the interface parameters in the finite element method.
2. The amount of restriction of the displacement at the cervical margin by placing a retention groove at the cervical wall was about three times as high as that by placing a retention groove at the occlusal wall.
3. Because of the relative amount of tensile components of the stress values in the buccolingual direction, the possibility of dislocation of the restoration was much higher at the cervical margin than at the occlusal margin.
4. It might be recommended that both occlusal and cervical retention grooves be used routinely, but if one, it be placed at the cervical wall.

Å°¿öµå

À¯ÇÑ¿ä¼Ò¹ý;°è¸éº¯¼ö;À¯Áö±¸;ÀÀ·Â;º¯À§;Finite element method; Interface parameter; Retention groove; Stress; Displacement

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI